Discussion: Supporting GMX Solana Expansion via Monthly GT Token Treasury Swap

Proposals
1

History

GMX Solana was started from a community discussion initiated by Q on the GMX forums in May 2024. After extensive discussion, the proposal received strong community backing, leading to DAO support, including funding for two independent audits to ensure protocol security. Following this groundwork, GMX Solana officially launched on March 12, 2025. Since launch, the platform has facilitated over $3.17 billion in trading volume, attracted approximately 2,393 users, generated $1.35 million in protocol fees, and currently maintains $503,000 in open interest and demonstrating strong early traction and growing user engagement. The GMX Solana team also bought $500,000 worth of GMX tokens from the open market and it is secured in the GMX Treasury.

Scaling GMX Solana

After the early traction towards GMX Solana it highlights the importance to ensure stable, ongoing support during the next phase of scaling. As GMX Solana transitions from launch to growth, key operational and infrastructure costs will increase especially in areas such as audits, protocol risk management, developer resources, infrastructure, marketing, and operations.

To ensure that GMX Solana ongoing development and growth are securely funded and to ensure as part of this process that GMX DAO continues to gain meaningful exposure to the growth of GMX Solana it is proposed.

To support this next phase effectively, the DAO could consider an option of having the GMX DAO purchase $110,000 worth of GT tokens per month from GMX Solana, with the tokens held in the DAO treasury.

This approach would serve two purposes:

  • It provides GMX Solana with consistent capital to fund critical areas of development and growth.
  • It allows GMX DAO to gain long-term exposure to GT, potentially benefiting from the upside as the Solana expansion progresses.

The price of GT for these purchases could be calculated using one of the following methods:

  • A 50% discount to the average mint price of GT over the past 30 days

  • The average redemption price over the past 30 days

Motivation

GMX Solana is the first expansion for GMX. As GMX Solana enters its next phase of growth, it’s critical that we support the project at this stage to help build momentum and ensure operational continuity. Consistent funding is essential across several core areas, including

  • Audit & Risk - To uphold protocol security.
  • Infrastructure - To maintain high performance protocol infrastructure.
  • Development - To continue improving core protocol features.
  • Marketing - To drive user acquisition and growth.
  • Operations - To support daily management and user engagement

A stable funding model provides GMX Solana with both the runway and flexibility needed to execute effectively, while also allowing GMX DAO to retain long-term value in the form of GT token assets that may appreciate as the ecosystem expands. The GMX Solana team has already launched or planning to launch several community-focused initiatives, such as trading competitions and GT rewards for LPs to drive more growth. With the proposed treasury swap in place, GMX Solana can scale more faster while accelerating development and user growth in a more sustainable way.

Conclusion

This proposal seeks community feedback on the treasury swap discussion. Once enough input has been gathered, a new proposal will be drafted to incorporate the community’s suggestions and concerns before moving forward to a formal vote.

1 Like
2

Are we serious?? Can’t believe it. $110k is almost the entire monthly income of the GMX treasury from fees. I strongly oppose the proposal because I see no point in spending DAO funds on a worthless asset (GT) that has been created out of thin air and is not backed by anything. These funds will never be recouped.

GMX-SOLANA is an independent project that has received sufficient support and funding from GMX already, yet has failed to deliver on all its promises. So let’s leave them to their own fate and focus on our own developments.

1 Like
3

Yeah, not a fan of this either, would love to see GMX Solana just getting some traction on their own rather than pushing GMX to acquire GT for whatever reason.

I just think GMX Solana should just focus on becoming profitable, increasing usage, volumes and fees, rather than putting on a bandaid with GMX buying GT doesn’t make much sense to me at this time.

Also, 110k a month isn’t nothing and would definitely be more beneficial to be in the GMX DAO for additional hiring, marketing or bd opportunities.

I would vote yes for this, if there’s some sort of KPIs that need to be done by GMX Solana before triggering a buyback of GT for any sorts,.

1 Like
4

GMX SOLANA fees also should be distributed to GMX holders if GMX dao treasury will be used for GT.

1 Like
5

some thoughts on this proposal

  1. GMX Solana has delivered on the code for the GMX Solana perp DEX, however finding the right product market fit has been difficult, if this investment is made we must also accept that it may not eventually pay off
  2. My understanding is that all core GMX Solana contributors are working on a voluntary basis and not receiving any payments, I believe the cost of $110k is only for infra, interface devs and audits for security. I think it would be good if a high level breakdown of the costs could be provided for more transparency on how the funds would be used
  3. I would propose that if this investment is made, that it be time bound to 12 months, so in 12 months either GMX Solana would be fully self sufficient, or we unfortunately would have to cease any further development on it, if the fees are not sufficient to cover the infra costs, then it may have to cease operation altogether
  4. perhaps some information could be shared on the plan for the next few months so the community can better make a decision on this

the details of GMX Solana tokenomics can continue to be adjusted, we should just be careful with changes that may make it even more difficult for GMX Solana to gain traction

for the time being, that GMX Solana’s tokenomics are based on buying back GMX is sufficient alignment in my view, and i believe GMX Solana contributors are open to changing the tokenomics based on a GMX community vote, i think this can be a separate discussion

i personally believe that it would be worthwhile giving GMX Solana 12 more months to continue to try to gain traction, because if GMX Solana ceases operation right now it would also mean accepting that GMX would no longer have a Solana deployment, which i feel is too early to give up here

5 Likes
6

Realistically, the numbers are skewed due to initial launch minting of GT. I do want GMXSol to succeed, but I would only vote YES if they have better treasury management.

The initial trading contest rules, several concerns on botting was brought up to them via Telegram, but they proceeded with it with the 30% adjustment. In the end this kind of contest dont provide liquidity stickiness, naturally target LP growth with better price impact volume will come naturally. They need to understand that before throwing money at the issue, making a trading contest auditting it, winding it down after afew rounds, just make it a volume play remove the last trade make it a week and 100% to top 5 at least u audited the cost, recoup cost of audit before winding down things.

Maybe come up with a better plan on how we could gain SOL traction, if there is a clear headed suggestion then yes i do think GMX can afford to help subsidized cost via the 110k monthly buyback else it just be tossing more money at the issue.

Not trying to downplay the efforts of Q and all he done for GMX by creating GMXSol too but we do need a more rationale plan to gain traction on Solana. Also GT is being devalued everytime you do a referral bonus / any bonus type of things, even if we buy GT at 50% Average pricing, the constant 400% bonus to referrals etc is not helping the valuation of GT. Additionally i see a GT for LP Proposal….

2 Likes
7

If Q wants this to pass, it’ll pass. He has the voting power based on his own holdings and his voting bloc.

Rather, in the spirit of mitigation, I’d rather focus on the $110k number. @Saurabh how did you arrive at the specific number of $110,000 per month? What’s the breakdown of costs? Could you accomplish these goals with say, 1/3 of that number? (Maybe on an extended timeline?)

Likewise, to build upon what X_Dev said, if funding were provided to GMX Solana, how would you do anything differently than what the GMXSol team has been doing for the past 3 or 4 months? How would things be different over the course of the next 12 months in terms of how you and the rest of your team operate? Requiring financial assistance means the current status quo of your project isn’t yielding the desired results. It’s just money down the drain if your Sept, Oct, Nov, activities are the same as your June, July & August ones. What are you guys going to do to pivot?

8

We spoke about GMX solana for what felt like a lifetime. Why wouldn’t you support one of the biggest supporters of GMX gain traction on Solana. While I am not sure of the mechanism GMX Solana failure to get traction isn’t because the product, it’s because we were late to the game.

1 Like
9

It is certainly too early to give up on GMX-Solana, but I’m not sure this level of treasury swap is the best remedy for its growing pains. What it primarily needs is more visibility among traders.

Reflecting on this proposal, I believe that there are other ways for GMX to stimulate engagement with GMX-Solana that would be more effective and cost-efficient.

For example:

  • Add Solana to the network selector in the main GMX dApp and link out to it.
  • Promote GMX-Solana’s key advantages and the opportunities of their upcoming campaign (incentives or launch of RWA markets) via a notification in the GMX dApp.
  • Publish a detailed post about GMX-Solana on the gmxio.substack.com blog to help drive attention from press and (~1000) followers
  • Collaborate on a week-long exposure campaign via the GMX account on X, where we highlight the upcoming RWA markets on GMX-Solana
  • etc.
4 Likes
10

First of all, thank you for the community’s active feedback. Before addressing all the questions, I’d like to first summarize what GMXSOL has accomplished recently and what GMXSOL plans to do next.

DONE:

May 2025

  1. Release v0.5.0 - Launched the first stable version of Rust SDK, supporting the final release of Solana V1.

June 2025

  1. Upgraded the core system to support Solana v2, introducing a callback mechanism and building the gmsol-competition program based on it.
  2. Completely refactored the CLI and fixed numerous legacy and newly discovered bugs.
  3. Successfully deployed on Mainnet after audits and testing, with a smooth upgrade process and no trading disruptions (only minor issues with SQD indexing service).
  4. Basic testing of the competition program completed on Mainnet, with rules executing correctly.

July 2025

Core Features:

  1. Implemented delayed virtual inventory mechanism to track market imbalance and adjust price impact.
  2. Enabled GT minting via borrowing fees.
  3. Added metadata management for GM/GLV tokens (icons and names).
  4. Embedded security.txt and launched the first bug bounty campaign via Code4rena.

Performance Optimization:

  1. Rewrote transaction builder to support automatic batching and parallel processing, improving efficiency for Keeper and oracle-related transactions.
  2. Completed Phase 1 of frontend performance optimization, significantly improving trade page load speed and reducing RPC load.

RWA Market Support:

  1. Integrated support for Chainlink Report Schema v2/v4 to ingest RWA price feeds.
  2. Added market closure logic and corresponding risk controls.
  3. Refined the RWA risk model and response mechanisms.

Ecosystem Development:

  1. Designed and built the core components of the next-gen Keeper architecture (distributed, low latency, supports transaction relaying).
  2. Initiated the new GMX-Solana frontend aligned with the GMX Mainnet visual style.
  3. Started writing internal architecture documentation and began preparing public resources for contributors and partners.

Trading Competitions:

  1. Launched and completed the first official trading competition under v0.6 rules, receiving positive community feedback.
  2. Identified limitations in the current rule set and began designing a more flexible format that integrates closely with the GT model for future versions.

New Features & Proposals:

  1. Designed a GT minting model based on LP staking duration (planned for v0.8).
  2. Integrated support for PUMP wrapped tokens (WPUMP) in both single-sided and balanced pools.
  3. Improved the SQD API and Dune dashboards to track Funding Rate history and GT buyback activity.

Early August 2025

  1. v0.7 has passed audit and fixes, with full Devnet testing completed:
  2. GT is correctly minted via borrowing fees.
  3. Token metadata displays correctly.
  4. Virtual inventory operates as intended, adjusting price impact.
  5. RWA markets can be created, supplied with liquidity, and traded, with operations correctly restricted during closed periods.
  6. Keeper fully supports RWA markets and is currently testing a next-gen indexer component.
  7. Mainnet deployment and initial RWA market trials succeeded.

TODO:

  1. Enhance on-chain support for RWA markets to enable the launch of more RWA assets and higher maximum leverage limits.

  2. Collaborate with Chaoslabs to establish a comprehensive risk monitoring and management framework.

  3. Launch liquidity mining (provide GT rewards to LPs).

  4. Implement JIT (Just-in-Time liquidity) to enable liquidity sharing across GM pools.

  5. Provide a robust Keeper API with support for real-time data subscriptions, low-latency execution, and atomic transactions.

  6. Deliver complete SDK support (Rust, TypeScript, Python) along with an automated trading framework (extensible to support GMX-EVM).

  7. Develop a new frontend fully aligned with GMX’s latest UI to enhance the user trading experience.

  8. Launch a marketing campaign in partnership with marketing agency Lunar Strategy.

  9. Explore a new version of trading competitions and a points-based reward system.

  10. Build the GMXSOL App.

4 Likes
11

Regarding the $110,000, based on X’s feedback, we need to provide a further breakdown.

Infras $60,666 / month:

  1. Zenith Audit $33,333 / month
  2. Chaos Labs for Risk Management $18,333 / month
  3. SQD + RPC $4,000 / month
  4. Cloud Servers for Keeper $5,000 / month

Marketing $6,666 / month:

  1. Wu Blockchain Marketing $6,666 / month

Developments $43,166 / month:

  1. Frontend Developments ( 4 devs ) $16,666 / month
  2. Backend Developments ( 2 devs ) $12,000 / month
  3. Operations ( 4 ops ) $12,000 / month
  4. Designs ( 1 designer ) $2,000 / month

Please note that all current GMXSOL core contributors are working voluntarily and are not receiving any compensation.

image
image1280Ă—487 65.7 KB

The GMX treasury revenue of last month is ~700k → 110k means 16% of the revenue to support the GMX SVM expansion. Even from the perspective of a regular community member, I believe it’s worth it. The failure of GMXSOL is not the failure of GMX, but the success of GMXSOL will surely be the success of GMX. Since launch, we’ve made progress and also faced challenges — but we’ve shown the determination to solve problems one by one, adapt continuously, and keep building. That persistence is the key to achieving greater success in the future.

5 Likes
12

Hi Tano,

I think if GMX had the opportunity to spend an additional 110k on hiring, marketing, or BD initiatives, I would be supportive of that as well. But from my perspective, the issue isn’t that GMX lacks funding — it’s that there simply aren’t enough meaningful opportunities to spend it on. Take Net OI as an example: it took nearly a year from my proposal to being confirmed for implementation in V2.2. If there had been a way to accelerate this process through funding, I believe the Treasury could have easily covered the cost, and every delegate would have voted yes. The reality is that the money isn’t being spent — because technical progress expecially in GMX requires careful and deliberate work.

GMXSOL, on the other hand, took just one year from proposal to full development, matching the progress of GMX V2 and becoming one of the most complex protocols on Solana. Take the current RWA deployment as example, GMXSOL as a new project is more flexible to experiment and iterate quickly.

GMXSOL proactively collaborated with Chaos Labs to finalize parameter formats and risk models, and with Chainlink to confirm schema formats and assist with the necessary adjustments — all of which GMX can now directly reuse for RWA. This alone represents tremendous value to GMX.

Looking ahead to the most important update — JIT (Just In-time Liquidity) — I believe the ability of both teams to reference each other’s work is highly valuable in reducing mistakes and avoiding dead ends. Not to mention, the entire GMXSOL development process effectively served as a deep and thorough audit of GMX V2 itself. And all the attention GMXSOL has gained on Solana ultimately benefits GMX too. In this sense, you could even argue that the GMXSOL team is GMX’s additional hiring, marketing, and BD opportunity.

As for the final point, I disagree with the implied causality. If GMXSOL were already capable of triggering those KPIs today or someday, then it wouldn’t need GMX’s support — in fact, we’d be aggressively accumulating GMX to support GMX instead.

6 Likes
13

gmxsol is a large and complex protocol to develop, I think that support now will bring very big profitability for gmx holders in the future by buybacking GMX like it was not long ago for $500,000.

2 Likes
14

Hi Btcfever,

You’ve raised a very reasonable question. I’ve listed above the details of GMXSOL’s expenditures along with the upcoming development plan for your reference. Thank you for your attention to this matter.

15

Hi Junwei,

Regarding the trading competition, the current mechanism is indeed not perfect. Based on user feedback, we have proposed and are implementing the Trading Competition V2 to continuously improve this mechanism. This does not mean it has been stopped, but no new competitions will be launched before its completion to avoid waste.

https://gov.gmx.io/t/gmxsol-trading-competition-framework-v2

1 Like
16

Hi Remarkles,

GMXSOL is indeed one of the most complex protocols on Solana and also has one of the largest codebases. I also share your confidence in its future prospects, though it will require more time, and the current pace of development and delivery is improving significantly.

2 Likes
17

I’ve always hated Solana because I’ve lost money on it. A bunch of ecosystem projects are nothing but exploitation, all the rigged stuff. Even the silly promotions from the Solana Foundation’s Toly are just rubbish.

Therefore, I don’t see a bright future for GMXSolana and will continue to vote against it.

I support integrating Suiccinct and expanding GMX to Ethereum’s L1, allowing traditional banks to see the potential of purchasing GMX financial services.

1 Like
19

You describe exactly MAIN idea and PRO-factor to expand to solana :joy:
its CASINO in its purest form! With crowds of excited players.
GMX+Solana = :blueberries::blueberries::blueberries::blueberries::blueberries::blueberries::blueberries::blueberries::blueberries::blueberries::blueberries::blueberries:

1 Like
20

We have a very big problem here. Voting rights are too concentrated in a few hands. It is particularly worrying that Q has the most votes and uses them for personal gain and his own project advantage. Almost all previous votes on GMX-SOL matters could be won by his single vote, even when everyone else (who voted) voted against it.

He abstained from the last vote because it was a GMX transfer directly to his personal wallet. However, upon closer examination of what was done with these 21,961 GMX tokens, serious doubts arise about transparency and the pursuit of personal gain. Although the proposal stated that- “Therefore, the GMX requested from the GMXSOL Treasury will be held by GMXSOL Labs to show continued support for GMX and to avoid placing sell pressure on the market.”, but in reality the GMX was used to help unvest ~12k esGMX across14 of his personal accounts.

It is clear that voting rights are too concentrated in one set of hands (not just Q), so I would like to invite all of you who have delegated your votes to the top 10 delegates to carefully reconsider and either redelegate or self-delegate.

21

Your post makes a few accusations without first asking questions for clarity, and this reduces the quality of the discourse instead of making it productive.

Let’s first talk about how the 50k GMX was purchased. There had always been a plan to push forward the GMX reserve as soon as possible, but there hadn’t been a suitable opportunity. When GMX dropped below 10 USD, I used my personal account to first buy 50k GMX, then initiated a proposal to see if the GMXSOL Treasury wanted to acquire these GMX at my purchase average price of 10 USD, when the market price was already above 11 USD. Everyone unanimously approved, so the GMXSOL Treasury was established.

As for why this GMX was transferred, the cost was originally covered by me, so this was compensation to me. I transferred it to various accounts to vest esGMX. Other than me, other members of GMXSOL Labs hold far more than 50k GMX. I hold 330k, and GMXSOL Labs as a whole has never sold a single GMX from the beginning until now.

On Tally regarding the GMXSOL proposal, even excluding my vote, Xdev’s vote was still decisive because there were no votes against it and everyone supported it overall; but with you, it turned into the idea that because I’m the No. 1 delegate it made it impossible to oppose. What is the motivation here?

As the largest GMX holder and someone who has submitted numerous proposals to GMX — SS Pools, BB&D, GMXSOL, Net OI, Post Position Price Impact, GHV, and more — is this how you “preserve GMX legacy”? By sowing discord between me and the community?

I call on:

  1. All community members who believe I am a negative asset to GMX to redelegate as soon as possible.

  2. I recommend redelegating to Xdev, Tano, GMX Blueberry Club (XM), and Snipermonke. They are truly contributing to the community and should never be replaced by power-hungry opportunists hiding behind noble-sounding words.

1 Like